Single Comment

I've played a bughouse-type game with 3 boards. The students who started playing it in the lobby of my dorm started out with about 4 or 5 people playing bughouse. This attracted attention and drew more people from the dorm in the next few days. Once there were at least 6 people, another board was brought out and they started playing 'crackhouse' (it was addicting like crack). The central board was the board for the more advanced player, and winning on this board would win the game for that team. The other way a team could win is if the 2 side boards are won for a certain team. The time limits were different for the central board than they were for the side boards. The central board was given less time, I think. But this would mean that timers were unnecessary for the side boards. I don't remember exactly how timing worked. Captured pieces from the sides moved towards the center, and captured pieces from the center went to either side depending on which player the central player decided needed the piece more. Kings were capturable (a captured king on the central board would end the game), and when a captured side king moved to the central board, the king in hand could negate a piece in hand from the opponent in the central board. Both pieces were removed from the game. This rule could be changed to something like 'king in hand can remove an opponent's piece on the board (except king), but not while in check'. The king in hand rules were not set in stone. It got pretty crazy. I played this game instead of studying for finals last year. Looking back, that was a bad decision. <p>I have to credit Nick for this game. He said that he and some friends invented it. If only I could remember his last name...